morepix: I don't know if it's just a testing fluke or a real camera difference, but the studio comparisons at high ISO (1600, 3200) look a good deal better for the GM5 than for my LX100. I'm seeing my $900 going down the drain. :-(

The LX100 at 1600 RAW looks about half a stop cleaner than the GM5 to my eyes.

Also don't forget that in real-world use, the lens on the LX100 has a 2-stop advantage over the bundled 12-32 at any focal length.

That means that in the same lighting conditions, you can use ISO 400 when a GM5 user would have to use ISO 1600. That's a real advantage right there. Of course, a GM5 user could strap on a 14/2.5, 17/1.8, 15/1.7, 20/1.7, 25/1.4, 45/1.8, 60/2.8, 12-35/2.8, 12-40/2.8 or any other m43 lens (such as the Noktons) if they want more speed (and are willing to spend the money).

That's the tradeoff between getting a CSC and an ILC. You have a package that's unmatched in speed and size for a given pricepoint, at the cost of versatility, range and ultimately, maximum aperture. I think both the LX100 and GM5 are fantastic cameras, and it's different strokes for different folks.

leschnyhan: Yeah, okay it doesn't have a mic input. On the one hand, most people who are trying to get really excellent audio would use a separate digital audio recorder anyway. But on the other hand--it seems like putting a mic input on the camera would be pretty straightforward, and a shoe-mounted mic would be useful on occasion.

The basic design reminds me a lot of the NEX-6 and NEX-7, and the feature set seems pretty similar to NEX-6 except that the Sony has a physically larger sensor that should translate to better image quality. (And has consequences for depth of field, too.) The one thing that keeps me away from MFT cameras is the MFT part.

And they're asking $999 for this thing? When an NEX-6 is currently available brand new for $798?

m43 certainly has a bigger range of native lenses than sony E mount, as well as more fast primes and specialty lenses.

Yes you can adapt DSLR lenses on a NEX, but then you've got a much bigger package to carry around as well as compromised AF performance.

oohaah: Why would they not include the "real" pureview sensor? Seems like a huge mistake in my opinion.

I was in the same boat as oohaah when the 920 was announced; I was disappointed that it would not have the 1/1.2" sensor of the 808.

However, I've come to the opinion that this was actually a smart technical move by nokia that was just handled badly in PR.

The 920 tackles a completely different problem than the 808 - low light handholdability. For the vast majority of users, being able to take sharp shots in indoors and in low light is a bigger problem than being able to outresolve a D800. And from a low light perspective, the 920 certainly sounds very promising.

Compared to a 808, the 920 sensor has 2.3 stops less light gathering area on the sensor, but the lens is 0.5 stops faster, and the OIS should manage at least 2 stops extra handholdability, so it comes out as a wash at worst for low light shots (as long as you have a static subject). All in a package significantly smaller than an 808.

I think nokia invented the right product but failed to convince its users.

I mainly do still, and I got a feeling that the $3500 is mostly for video features..and I really wanted to like to 5D3

do you have the same feeling?

If Canon had to develop a second camera body just for stills, it would cost them more money to design, manufacture, distribute and market a separate camera for what is increasingly becoming a niche market (just as video was niche in the days of the 5D MkI). Because of this, there's no guarantee that a video-less MkIII would be appreciably cheaper than the current MkIII.

Boissez: This is the first cameraphone that truly cuts the mustard. However I don't believe I'll buy it unless they'll put in some sort of protection for the lens. Such a shame really because the quality seems to exceed my current lx3 in a pocketable form factor (the phone part is just a bonus). Oh and RAW would be nice too but I'm not holding my breath on that one.

I had an N80 and the sliding cover did absolutely nothing to prevent dust buildup.

I also have an N8 and the lens cover is still going strong despite being made of plastic.

Really bummed that the 808 is not coming to America, I would have been happy to upgrade from my N8, but there is no way in hell that I am getting a WP7 phone. They need to license the tech to some Android phone makers.